tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN June 29, 2016 12:00am-2:01am EDT
they are going to push back and treat the theocratic mentality and have a vision because otherwise there's the cognitive dissonance that prevents the advancement of the ideas that can happen this laboratory in america. >> take your medical and now to step further in europe for two trading symptoms instead of addressing the root cause. i assume you could analogize this to a misdiagnosis. in this instance that we missed a diagnosis as a malady that has brought about as a result of poverty and the result of lack of educational opportunities or a career opportunity what might we mess? >> we would miss the fact that the prisoners in saudi arabia and syria are fighting not for poverty against poverty. they are fighting for freedom and for liberty and in this great society we can even recognize the voices, the descendents voices but if you look in the cold war's -- being
told that their voices don't matter at all that matters is the economic plight and in the meantime marker from the cold war would cozy up to the tie and condescend not soviet con is that our allies when the root problem was communism and socialism and collectivism so in this battle the root problem is the overseas and the government at least take size within the house of islam and let the air's and the pakistani stop seeing us is cozying up to the theocratic that are pressing the movement against the hundreds of millions and for the majority of the green revolution, the revolution that ousted the muslim brotherhood. right now we are leading by not using the terms we are letting the islamists define and lead what is to be a muslim and i reject that as an american-muslim who loves his constitution. thank you very much dr. jasser.
thank you senator lee. senator klobuchar. >> i think senator durbin might do next. our right, well thank you very much. thank you mr. chairman for hoping is hearing and thank you senator coons and thank you chair witnesses. this hits home for me. with the largest mali population of the country. i was just went out to me with her first ambassador and 25 years to somalia ambassador schwartz i'm in has been an foreign service broker for 20 years and is taking on this difficult assignment and understands this is a balance in the balance is going after terrorism and in place of somalia going after isis and it's also going after extreme ideologies, extreme ideologies, islamic extremism here at home. in our community we love our somali community.
nearly 100,000 people. i have a full-time somali outreach who has been elected to the school board. we have people who are running businesses, who are part of the fabric in our state and i was a prosecutor managing an office of foreigner people during 9/11 where musawi was captured and so we get this belmont's and we see it all the time radar we figured my mission is a prosecutor was to convince the guilty and protect the innocent. what i have seen, the change from 9/11 than the bush u.s. attorney went around to the mosques and assured people that president bush's direction that they would not be victims of hate crimes and they would not be bullied that we would stand up for them and that was part of america. i've seen different rhetoric right now that is hurting those communities and not furthering justice. i met with some of our people from our muslim community a few
months ago at a mosque and heard the story of a family that had gone out for dinner. the family had experienced a discrimination before. they were simply having dinner with her two kids and a man walked by and he said you or go home to where you came from. the little girl looked at her mom and said mom, i don't want to go home. he said we could go out to dinner tonight. i want to e dinner here. i want to eat dinner at home. these are the words of a child because she only knows one home and that is minnesota and she only knows one home and that is the united states of america. so in a state where we now have dozens of segments against people who have been trying to go to join the evil terrorist organizations of ousted bob and isis where we have convicted people in just the past month understanding how important this is respecting our law enforcement and fbi and u.s. attorneys, u.s. attorneys at appointed by the supposed reason
for their work. i don't understand how we can -- an entire religion and an entire community because of the concept of a few so this is a balance. i guess my first question and i have heard congressman ellison's name was raised. he is my congressman. he is a man of great patriotism and he is a man that is. up with one of the most conservative members over in the house who took michele bachmann seat to start. the two of them have done that together because we don't see politics as getting in the way of not just the prosecution of criminals and evil but also in the defense of american, innocent americans. i heard his name was raised but i know and i want everyone in the panel to know that he has been an advocate for funding as i have been and senator franken and i as have many to figure out how we can go after this and figure out when young kids, no
parent wants their kids to grow up to be a terrorist are influenced by this that we can do a better job of identifying problems and that's where the homeland security i know jeh johnson will be testifying here and we will ask them about this. we are putting out grants from homeland security. we put something like 50 million in the last appropriations bill to try to go after this violent extremism and i guess i would ask you mr. chairman how you think this could work and how this is part of the solution in addition to what i support his strong law enforcement to prevent these kids from being influenced in the first place. >> thank you for the question and i've been fortunate enough to go to minneapolis and speak quite a bit with the minneapolis somali american community. i think part of the problem is keeping the frame as extremism. when you look at the foreign travel in the first instance
during the somalia civil war, there was an invasion from a foreign country into their ancestral homeland so since there has been a united states of america, americans have gone to fight in foreign conflicts, not just one that they have familial attachment to put where they fell some interest in either becoming part of the bigot venture or some ideological attachment to one side or another and we have treated that as a normal part of american life. we now have this prism of extremism whereby a net ignore the complex going on and treated as a problem within the heads of these children and my concern is that by doing so what we are doing is shoving the conversations about those foreign conflicts into this dark corner of the room.
so parents tell their children, don't talk about politics in somalia or syria and iraq when you are in the classroom. don't talk about that. >> i don't think that is what this program is about. it's not about that. about working with communities and trying to give them the support they need so that kid is starting to have issues and they see things that they start pairing them up with people so they can figure what's happenings. >> i've been looking at these programs. >> we go support them? >> is difficult to say that because i can't get information about them. we have been trying very hard, these are public programs. we should be a will to evaluating publicly. >> i will be asking jeh johnson about this when he comes in for the hearing. i want to hear some the other views here because some of the people that a been recruited in minnesota, a lot of times it's people on the internet and obviously we have first amendment rights and maybe you
mr. cohen and we'll move on because i'm two minutes over about what we should be doing here to limit some of this recruiting and taking responsibility for the private and public sector. this is slick recruiting that's going on right now within our midst. >> thank you for the question. we have to put out alternative voices and not have a narrative that we are opposed to them or that we are attacking their religion. you know there was a study done by the people at duke and they surveyed almost 400 law enforcement officials and talked to over 200 community members and a variety of focus groups and the sense was that there were sort of an oppressive atmosphere from law enforcement
toward these communities and that i think is pernicious and counterproductive. i think we have to maybe restart and rethink some of these programs and of course provide alternative narratives for young people and if i could add one more thing if i could. a lot of the rhetoric in the presidential campaign has been i think traditions for young people. we did a nationwide survey of teachers asked what has happened in your classroom as a result of this? there are a lot of kids who are feeling bullied, a lot of kids were feeling scared especially the young people. >> i have heard the same thing. >> and that's a dangerous thing so i think it's quite important that all of us especially people in your position and positions of other persons on this committee to speak out against that. that does something that president bush focused on after 9/11. >> it made a big difference.
>> thank you very much. >> thank you. senator sessions. >> thank you mr. chairman. mr. cohen i remember during the civil rights stays in your position was an outstanding firm for equality and offered the entire headquarters and went after them aggressively and condemned their radical ideas. i don't think there's anything wrong with that mr. jasser are you saying that it's all right if someone advocates a position that is extreme or violent or anger batter bowl with the republican doctrine of america or our constitutional order that they should be challenged on those beliefs? isn't that the honestly we debate issues in this country? >> i believe there is nothing that would melt away muslim bigotry more than for americans to see muslims stepped to the plate and counter theocracy that once they see that we are the
most essential head of the sphere in this battle and the sea are muslim reform unit that has 50 principles are where we condemn all concept of the islamic jihad we condemn the sharia state we condemn the caliphate. we senator grimm mosque in muslim organization in america and gotten crickets that. why? big is the media academic and government are composedly giving muslims a pass and weighing in about whether american constitutionalism and i hear president bush's administration what he said post 2011 is completely different. the arab awakening has at least a need to counter the regimes that have fixed the narrative in the west so to compare what we did pre-2011 post-arab awakening is just. >> mr. jasser i remember during the civil rights stays national tv networks, maybe they were atheists. maybe they were jewish or
catholic or whatever going into churches in the south taking a camera in the faith -- sticking it camera of a base of a preacher asking them does a black person worship in your church, yes or no. this is a difficult question it was. tough but i thought in retrospect that kind of challenge cause people to realize the position was untenable. you could not be defended in public debate and he went away essentially. is that the kind of challenge you think about to be made to extremist groups within the islamic rubric? >> we need to challenge the slums to realize that violent comes from nonviolent. violent misogyny evolves from nonviolent misogyny so when the president goes to mosque with the islamic -- a baltimore.
it had a sermon which was a screed against or the year pray that our reform movement publicizes that why is he going to this mosque in and appear to be a bigotry of low expectations is somehow we don't hold thousands accountable to the same values we do everybody else in the west and in this country but at the national prayer breakfast the christians in the jewish and others but when it comes to muslims the mosques is the in the 13th century comes to women's rights, and other rights of the issue is treat us with tough love hold us accountable in the bigotry that exists in america will melt away because they will see us as essential. >> the islamic world and the muslim religion are great religion. millions of people, millions of people follow the doctrine and don't believe in these things. villages and cities throughout the world where this occurs and
i don't see anything wrong with challenging that doctrine. mr. mccarthy they say this is not islam but the people who practice this ideological violent terrorist idea of belief they are practicing islam. tonight they certainly do and they have a lot of basis for doing so. >> with guard -- regard to ms. khera i think there is some theological issues here. if you believe your religion calls for certain things you may not believe that but some do and this causes part of the problem does it not mr. mccarthy? >> i think the biggest problem you have is the imputation of the betrayed and bias to fact. when i was a prosecutor doing these cases it was simply a fact that there are commands to violence in the scripture, that
they are mediated and exploited by people like the blind sheikh and they inspire young muslims to commit violence. now, the way he interpreted those verses is certainly not the only way to interpret them and a lot of the heroic work that dot or jasser does is to precisely try to either correct but may be translation errors or could to contextualize these verses but are we really going to put our heads in the sand about whether they are there? >> that is what we are doing. i wish it were not so common that there are people that can find verses within the koran that justifies violence and we can say it's not religious if we want to but they think it is.
mr. haney, i understood that sharia law, is it a part of the carranza and is it a call to sharia law part of the carranza? i did know that it was. speak up. >> is called the dean. there are several names for it dean means law or religion. sharia is derived from a combination of the corona itself the hadith sayings and actions of muhammad and also what you might call tradition all combined together into one consensus it's a very important concept that sharia is the driving force of the global islamic community and
simultaneously the global islamic movement. what we see are expressions or tactics, ways to implement or i should say ways to achieve the goal of implementing sharia law, tactical ways all way in the spectrum of what is called allah promotion or petition to join islam of do what we call jihad another operative verbs that means water or push away. those groups are more frequent in the koran than just hot sofa we are going to have an honest discussion about the strategy and tactics of the global islamic movement like several of you have said here than what we really need to do is to address with honesty and courage the verbs in the meanings of the worse if we have been constantly told to ignore or purge away and what they actually mean and how they drive the individuals that
we have seen like syed farook and tashfeen malik and other people like that the tsarnaev brothers. >> you are very calm push prosecutor. i recall the manson trial. they proved the ideology the motivating factors for the manson group and why they did the murders. that is what you did in your case, did you not? you identified and proved as part of your case the motive based on what they interpreted their faith to mean. >> i respectfully find it mind-boggling to have a conversation in which it suggested that we need to turn a blind eye to ideology when you actually get into the four corners of the trial.
most of the charges that we bring which are essentially conspiracy cases in almost every single instance. the evidence they say we should look at for purposes of the investigation is the evidence that the prosecutor has to admit that the trial in order to prove wills -- will fund is an order to prove intent and knowledge. we are actually saying in investigating people who might potentially commit a terrorist attack we have to close our eyes and ideology but if we are lucky enough to indict them at some point and we get them to trial than we can put into evidence all the things we can look at when we investigate. how crazy is that? >> well just briefly, if this nation cannot admit everybody would like to come here to immigrate to america and there are muslim advocates. is it appropriate to ask
questions about how they interpret it or not? is it unconstitutional protection that the united states cannot inquire to see who might be the most successful immigrant? >> i don't think there's any constitutional impediment to it. that said during the 1960s into the early 80s there was a lot of statutory work that was done supportive of the proposition that we need to be worried about ideology, that is not not a cause of trigger a violent action and therefore we are only going to look at violent action when we decide whether to ring people and are not. it was not constitutionally necessary to do that and i think a lot of that was caused by the fact that the supreme court in the 60s and the 70s gave expanded first amendment protect protect -- protection expanded
or radical as some. whatever you think about that we are now in the threat environment where it's not a hypothetical question about whether there's an ideology that triggers mass murder attacks. we are seeing it. >> mr. chairman thank you and i appreciate the hearing and we are being spasm i'd call it with within islam that experts have testified that we are in committees. so many radical ideas leading to these kinds of attacks and is it's going to take a long time for us to see that and maybe think him bent on assault to be firm, defend their country but at the same time think deeply about the right way toandle it religion is something we all in this country respect, the freedom of religion. >> thank you senator sessions. >> mr. chairman can i respond to
something that was said earlier? >> we are going to recognize senator durbin. >> thank you very much mr. chairman. i listened to senator sessions questions and i think he is moving us to where we had to be. mr. cohen when the organization would have to the ku klux klan you are where that symbol was a flaming cross and that they believed somehow they were espousing the teachings of christ. >> they were purifying the race, yes. >> these race perfect haitians ended up in hateful and violent murderous tactics against african-americans. >> that was the way they did business. >> catholics and jewish. they were a hate filled group that used a flaming cross in your purse by christianity for justification. westboro baptist church sends demonstrators to the funerals of
our fallen soldiers. i've seen them and they'll annoy and they put up these hateful signs that say the soldier died excessive and because of marriage. their they believe is part of their christian belief. i think the point that has been made over and over by three members of this panel is it is a mistake for us to call the ku klux klan a radical christian were to call westboro baptist radical for students. they are extreme with their violent and their radical and unacceptable but it reflects on all of us. if you use a term that is so broad in its application. no one is arguing mr. mccarthy that someone who is in dangerous ideology should ever be allowed to emigrate the presumptive republican nominee donald trump is make in that distinction my friends. he wants to exclude all muslim immigrants. that to me is where he is gone
way beyond the need to protecting america and the territory which i hope this country will never ever embraced it's interesting to me the last week we had a -- in the florida senate on terrorism in the debate got down to the question as to whether or not we should be wearing or careful when a suspected terrorist wants to buy an assault weapon, a firearm and many of the said let's err on the side of safety. unfortunately only a republicans would join senator collins another republican when she suggested that maybe we keep the guns out of their hands until we find out whether they are truly shouldn't be on the no-fly list. we couldn't carry the day so the presumption when it came to 2nd amendment was give them the gun and ask questions later. now we have this hearing and instead of dealing with suspected terrorists we are dealing with a suspect religion.
that's where i think we have crossed the line. if they're those who would abuse their religious beliefs threaten others and threaten america for goodness sakes use of all of our power to protect us. the notion that we would call for radical christians, radical islam in such and therefore have the right answer to america safe is fundamentally wrong. i have 20 disagreements on george w. bush on the spectrum of issues but i still marvel at the fact that after we all we went through on 9/11 he would say to america quote all america's most recognized in the face of terror is not the true face of islam. it's a faith that is made brothers and sisters -- based upon love not hate. thank you president george w. bush.
for reminding us of that terrible moment in history who the real enemies were. they want people of islamic faith and they want those with extremist views like the ku klux klan and like hatemongers of westboro baptist church. that resident at that moment history got it right. we have got to get it right today because we are being called unlike many generations have in the past to respond to the legitimate fear of terrorism in a way consistent with our american values and when we look at this notion that we are going to condemn a faith i think we have gone way too far. ms. khera i know you want to say something but let me ask you first do you live in a muslim neighborhood? >> no, i do not. >> do you know what a muslim neighborhood is? >> i was scratching my head at that when i first heard that
term use. the muslim community in the united states with few phuoc sections is actually quite spread out and integrated into the broader america. >> that is my experience too that i can show you some irish catholic churches in chicago and some areas on the north shore where jewish populations live but muslim populations at large per se and they seem to be dispersed family and we talk about the trolling and enforcing muslim neighborhoods i'm at a loss. what was he trying to say? what is a muslim neighborhood? ..
>> >> let me just dash i called senator flake at his home on a saturday evening when he visited the mosque in arizona and thank him. >> i sent personal thank-you letters as well. >> it was such a thoughtful gesture totally consistent. >> i think jim for having the courage to do it. >> i just want to make it clear that there have been hundreds of islamic scholars
in united states and around the world that have condemned tourism routinely in in fact, there are some scholars who have taken on the narrative of isis at great peril to themselves the number of them have received death threats because of the work they're doing. so i cringe when people say they're not speaking out against their faith. >> this is an important year and glad we're having it is there a fight for the heart and soul of most radicals and muslims? is that a fair statement?
>> it is about the fact that terrorism is days and to amend the underbelly of it i cringe at the thought. >> there is definitely robust discussion within the muslim communities. >> is is important to side with those that were given peace with us to build a better faith and those that share our values so here is what i have learned after 37 trips to iraq and afghanistan. all things equal most moms and dads don't want to turn their daughters over to them. so when i hear they're all the say they're not. the bottom line is that it will be culturally
different. sweeney partners of the face. back here at home how many do you think we're fighting a war? >> there is obviously a war. >>. >> so what do we do with the radical leaders out there that sympathized? >> i have never heard of one inside of the united states. >> i believe there are imam that condemn violence but they sympathize with the division of the world if that is a land of for so it could be fought in because
they didn't to advance the idea through the evangelism of a sea of political mentality. >> the only reason i mention this i don't want to profile. let me tell you my experience. a young man grew up in afghanistan graduated from high school as but sen interpreter with a former high school wearing a uniform his job was to guard me and if you do have a radical preacher or whenever is it okay to follow them
and monitor what they do? >> so to espouse radical thoughts and having radical thoughts is not illegal so then we went to the airforce that was 1977 to be a part of the communist party who so the enemy was the communist ideology is all i am suggesting is this young man who happens to be an american muslim hates the ideology as much as i do because he is the first victim because he is worse ever problem but i am trying to suggest the guy who did the killing in orlando is
the same as a suicide bomber in syria. >> s.a. subject matter expert to protect the american people the threat of foreign and domestic because this organization operating in the united states very plainly from the intention. and in english and says. >> you are not answering my question there is a current that is close to shore real lawyer talking about the tactics of radicalism. >> who is the fbi guy?
[laughter] >> ordered the odds they going to the samos cannot know each other? >> i have no idea. >> call i am suggesting is the american muslim to take up arms but had to create a hero when you have centers of radical activity how in the hell could it be a big guy killed 49 people at the club in orlando the winter
the same mosque that there is it something going on? >> it is entirely reasonable and if we feel we are so hamstrung. >> that is the point that you cannot talk about the obvious? >> in my case it was the hub of the conspiracy used for recruiting and conspiratorial conversations. and they used it because they thought that was a safe place to do that. and not just so law enforcement but intelligence gathering in what is supposed to be a war with the authorization of military force in harm's way
>> having said that the overwhelming majority are not that way but when you have a connection and how you deal with it? and what your perspective as much as anybody else. >> it is how you define radical. they want to take up arms against america. and with those religious rulings. in those that perpetrate conspiracy theories all of these are the underbelly of ideas. any is a 12 step program. and with the connection of nonviolent islam is some. but they're not going to
connect it just like alcoholics that made the first up they are in denial and we perpetrate that. >> id law-enforcement if there is reasonable suspicion. >> this is a good way to end of this. >> we're fighting a war not a crime. and i am convinced you are worried we have gone too far the of the right. >> en your testimony you talk about peaceful muslims in america working with you to help prosecute the case can you describe to this committee the difference between the muslims they and islamism that faces violent
jihad? >> i think it is hard to define the muslim faith because there are too many divergent interpretations. it is easy to identify islamism that i really call sure riata -- sharia law. but my impression listening to the back and forth today is we're underestimating how serious the problem is. i don't think it is a handful of radicals vs everyone else that would just raise the west. with a well-known classic manual to data will supply with the committee's permission.
and open to the page that says g. hyde means to war against non muslims and expected -- explains the etymology we could go through several different aspects and so forth. and with sandy mccarthy's view, this is a manual that is important enough to include the endorsement basically the sharia law faculty at the center.
but also with the islamic thought. and i believe from the early '80s. so the point is that if read via a - - ideology is radical because it supplant the constitution since the core tenets are antithetical. so to me that his radical if you want to blow up of privilege or not. here want to there is a lot of people that buy on to this to some degree or another. some percentage of them are jihadist.
toehold that it has on a group of 126 billion people. it is your testimony we do lead to service to the muslim community when we lumpen the peaceful muslims the share our values so is that a fair understanding? >> it is too easy there is no urgency. the there is an urgency against a the root cause it was a bipartisan effort to lay out what are the ideas in the faith of islam that separated without political movement.
and at the core is the identification the reason he is recruiting to the level that he is they end up wanting to die. kinnealey counter to that is starting to teach our kids is preferable to want to die for america until we start teaching the difference in the engaging in programs that do that. >> thanks for your courage to defend truth at risk than knowing risk of personal risk that is a powerful import blood dash important demonstration of courage when senator graham asks his questions and found one exchange quite remarkable that senator graham
announced if there were any radical imam in the united states and her testimony when she had never heard of any radical imam in the united states who heads the but the sub al qaeda zero or isis provide fine that truly astonishing although i would note is a entirely consistent with the purge that testified about the obama administration has undertaken because one of the things the upper jaw did was. >> and removed the references as an incubator so her testifying is consistent with the purge. and and the exact question
so did you encounter? >> we can't forget. but "the blind sheik" was one of the most knowledgeable people scholars and my time consistently talks about the implementation of sharia law that is a different than the ideology of al qaeda or isis anyone there reads their magazines are studies the ideology colossally quoting islamic law. they are constantly quoting that. so we have a fundamentally flawed approach and we have
to look at sharia law that as a much bigger problem than what we're willing to except. >> talking to 911 when the call was recorded and i will read a portion the operator asked what is your name? >> favorite is the pledge allegiance. >> what is your name? >> on behalf of the islamic state. >> that is what the tape recording shows however run the attorney general released it the words omitted the been the islamic state. what does it say that fed
department of justice is said is seeing in the racing the statement of who he pledges his allegiance to? to mccaffrey note with that would be consistent with the purchase consisted of removing references to mosques specifically as a radicalization and incubator. >> yes, sir. >> mr. mccarthy and want to talk about the threat of islam is some.
that this deliberate blindness cost american lives over and over. looking at little rock course he inverted dino over and over we see warning signs they had evidence does not prevent to it. the above minister issued new to be an electronic communication and though is just a reference to the obama administration new asked about the possible justification since but yet the administration did nothing but in your view is
and then ended up culminating of the two brothers to set off a pressure cooker bombs at the boston marathon that injured approximately 180 and are those days if the fisker red flag that ought to be met with the serious law-enforcement and response to prevent its acts of terrorism? i believe they treat to the ideology as if it was not a trigger to violence.
russia and says you should be in thanks for the hearing. i am interested in late of the statements made of allegiance, that were made to privacy in freddie no. and the credit taken by i isis at least for the orlando massacre. what objective evidence there is that isis is inspiring were supporting rate ended think there is evidence of it. if only of what has been
>> we could kill a remember of the al qaeda at robo if rigo does live dash and if and the spread after the doctrine to say we play wack cable with jihadi groups. and anything is to enact of desperation and a reflection of their weakness so we have to be very careful over the reach but if they reach out
violence. first is protected by the first amendment the latter is says he and the only are you ineffective but an american. i cannot believe we would have that type of activity in our snack but she struck up violent -- a balance with prosecuting with those individuals who are committed to ask if there
the mistake that they are inclining toward the video of ideologies period closing with you, this mission has been made that the obama administration the to do the job to keep american safe he was surveil several times are directly and indirectly for those that were trying to see what they would commit to but there were two different possible theories of the case.
one is the obama administration this is disrespectful to what i know in what i have known frankly when they see a clear threat they don't care atlantic -- and don't care about political correctness but despite repeated attempts to build incredible case, he didn't take action in el way to allow and as communicated in one of the largest communities they have taken case after case after case to trial and successfully prosecuted.
but "this is it" seem credible to career law enforcement agencies on correctness but tuesday he was supported for those other on the battlefield not taking enough credible steps and secondly york city police commissioner bill bradley said wide scale surveillance programs that targeted the muslim community failed to produce a single piece of actionable intelligence and frankly didn't work. so how can we strengthened the hand of federal and local law enforcement to keep us safe? >> i do believe the men women there doing everything possible under the of lot
and in the cases were red flags are raised, my concern is they're not looking for the right thing or indicators of violence but radicalization depending on whatever model that is. in some cases the models are not accurate. i also agree on the issue of chief bratton we're the surveillance of the entire communities that is why during the of period they're in place cases were missed because there were looking to broadly rather than focusing in both of those travel overseas to terrorist training camps maybe we should put more resources there instead of watching anisette muslims. >> thanks to the whole panel
for your testimony and those who have engaged today. read to have an important question about how to keep american safeco to strengthen the hand in a way that respects bellies and doesn't come up against the cherished first amendment freedoms. if you paulette radical islam or extremism spending three hours arguing over the semantics has moved us closer to developing a more effective way to defeat isis i look forward to dip coming period with secretary johnson here and we will all follow going forward. i am deeply troubled from the current election season -- and to ban all muslims
coming in to united states to keep a list and actively keep the amount and as we try to keep to a country saved. and i worry that proposals and they're following hearken back to the worst chapter in american history. this great nation turned its back on japanese-american focusing of over 100,000 people solely on the japanese ancestry. and as i prepared for today cannot forget the meeting i had his name was given as a
>> thanks to each of the witnesses for coming i will briefly make the closing observations. several colleagues invade and locations and if or crush its i would agree that the kkk is bigoted in medieval and has no place in a civilized society and i would note the suggestion that that could somehow be extended to the christian faith and dr. martin luther king were christian and ministers and one of the
most powerful of written from the birmingham jail as the right to murder others because they do not share the fate. and we should speak candidly and vigorously for anyone advocating for their murder of innocents a secondment observation that is disappointing after hearing day testimony of 876 documents. >> but then about the purge
that resulted in to lead the uncovered she hide from the 9/11 report after report after report that apparently there at the -- the censorship of intelligence materials is not a concern to my colleague. i would note the senate has a long history to hold the executive accountable at the time reface a global war on terror i hope my colleagues on the democratic side will express real concern about a censorship. >> if you months before a
general collection could be irresistible and i would do nothing about that. [laughter] but yet not a single one of the democratic colleagues asked questions or express concerns as to why over and over to respond to read maya eggs before those terror attacks were carried out. law enforcement cannot be perfect butted is the obligation of the senate the red flags are there the signs of their bid to administration does not connect the dots to prevent the sacks of terrorism. saddens me not a single question from the democratic side of the aisle focused on
why did we do more to prevent these facts before they happen? it isn't a question of semantics whether the administration is willing to read knowledge with the threat is and willing to act to prevent acts of terrorism before they occur and once again thanks to each of the witnesses for being here we will keep the record open for an additional five business days and the hearing is adjourned. [inaudible conversations]
bones but it brings life to the bones. >> can professor of history of brigham young talks about how the pioneers first settled salt lake city and began setting up satellite communities in these families established provo when 1849. watch this weekend on booktv saturday and sunday the cities tour working with their cable of soviets visiting cities across the country.
>> welcome everyone to the hearing of the regulations of the medicare partied demonstration the center for medicare/medicaid services is here to testify on today's topic very important to radical alter the ways that medicare pays for drugs and biologics the way it is administered to patients in the outpatient settings covered under par to be typically these are treatments that are tested in a hospital used to retrieve full their bull beneficiaries with serious medical conditions such as cancer in room atop '08
arthritis macular degeneration in diseases and this past march but what does propose demonstrations made public it makes my opinion very clear i believe this experiment is ill-conceived to harm the beneficiaries there is another part of that in my opinion goes beyond the agency's statutory authority to extend a nationwide to require all providers to participate because the experiment would change the like to hear an explanatio which that has inherent concerns are by to hear an explanation as to why they believe the new payment changes will not harm beneficiaries so far with a have given us who lacks any justification or explanation
and that isn't all from the elements of the demonstration republic this proposal is troubling and i am being kind. for example, they hadh indicated where the physician has the option to prescribe a higher low-cost drug that has the same benefits and in addition would with the analysis of howlo many physicians would losee notn money purchasing these drugs and that analysis how often the beneficiaries have to go to the more costly hospitalct setting they have not indicated how will assess the impact of quality during the course of of evaluation
not surprisingly the proposed experiment has been widely condemned by experts and stakeholders almost immediately after it was released we received a letter from over 300 organizations asking for help asking them to withdraw the proposal this includes the arthritis foundation, a caregiver action network immune deficiency foundation, lung cancer alliance and the national alliance for mental illness.e pl those that have reached out with concerns represents patients that suffered and need the drugs including cancer arthritis and hip to represent the physicians who treat the patients was devastating conditionshe including oncologist and wen have heard many of the same
concerns. many feel that the proposed demonstration that the street their conditions require them to go great distances to receive the needed care obviously utah is not alone those providers from every state have weighed in on the matter could have prompted the republican members to send another letter urging these withdrawal of the proposal.e 14 senators sent a detailed how did the agen letter about their proposal and how did the agency respond? we received a form letter thanking the committee members for sharing their views that they will consider all public comments it could not have been more dismissive its town also
that seriousness describing oversight from congress for seven years the entire obama administration hasoversight efff stonewalled or if not ignored oversight efforts there are countless examples sometimes the agency showed disregard for the wallet and the refuse to provide a response to numerous inquiries about illegal insurance payments from the affordable care enacted other times they ignore entirely like denying access to last week's medicare putting the ady trustees report so and told the press was conference with their own misleading spin our have on numerous occasions during
these hearings expressed my hope that the administrationan as of whole becomes more cooperative than transparent i have passed countless nominees to come before the committee to commit to being responsive to senators increase in over seven years that disregard has continued so with a short time left to this and restoration i willf renew the talks for more cooperation but if there are no new or improvements on the immediate horizon to have a high-ranking administration official we hope the very least it to get some straight answers to the many questions of the proposal our witness stated in an early interview of the proposed demonstration that they're willing to interact with congress to take a back
and make adjustments as necessary and they do hope our conversations today are more consistent with that sentiment rather than the response after that statement was made the constituency represent deservedly so much so withs that i will turn to the senator for his opening remarks. >> thank you very much. in my view what underlies this debate is we are entering an era where there is going to be miracle treatments and cures drug czar on the market and on the horizon that was science-fiction not veryry long ago so the question for me is whether or not the american people are going toss be able to afford these
medicines with business as usual to many of these treatments will clobber too many family budgets to threaten health programs across country and that was one of the big takeaways from the 18 month investigation senator grassley and i conducted on a bipartisan basis into theit wa rollout of one blockbuster drug. a drug that treats hepatitis c and have a list price of $1,000 a pill. i think this will be the of pattern, colleagues for years and years to come lots of cures in the big question mark when it comes to access and affordability. now the hepatitis c drug of
the bipartisan inquiry is not the primary focus of today's hearing today the committee will examine the demonstration project which of course, is of medicare program covering outpatient care it pays for a small the demonstration has he demonstration would affectro the way they're paid for it is brought to the forefront and major questions of the country can afford to address the trends of the escalating pharmaceutical prices put the fact is to many seniors are pounded by prescription drug bills and in my view there is an enormous amount of work that has to be done to guarantee that seniors have affordable access to the medications they need.
medicare part b seniors were hit especially hard because their share of drug cost is coat insurance instead of co pay that means rather than a flat fee, some facing hugeen the burden stock paying a percentage of a drug pilot that burden the same we're looking at the are raisingt out-of-pocket cost with out-of-k medicare party so i propose legislation to establish the out of pocket cap to help protect older people and in my view this committee ought to take a close look at ways to make sure that seniors don't get pounded under part b as well but the important questions to be addressedte with this project is why all committee democrats and i
sent a letter to the acting administrator to outline the questions of the impact of the project would have on patients and that their core our concerns are about making insure that older people who are especially vulnerable have access to life-saving medications today se protecting access is especially important to rule c america were seniors today so often face fewer choices and lower quality of care it is extremely important the pilot project not result of patients being told the house to have treatment up a hospital where often is more costly and less convenient. movs reset test to be in sync with the effort medicare is making to treatment based on value rather than volume when you focus on value
there is the potential to raise the quality of care for older people while saving money at the sameex time. i hope the committee will examine these issues carefully as it looks at the demonstration also thanks to dr. conway for joining and we look forward to his tonight i wo testimony as we have a chance to ask questions. >> dr. connolly is here on behalf senators - - signer of medicaid medicaid and services he is known forpr health programs a serving assistance of 100 million medical people those overstate thatestie center in the chief medical officer makes him well-suited to testify onat the proposed drugs
demonstration dr. conway was the director of hospital medicine and an associate professor at cincinnati children's hospital here in his medical degree and completed pediatric residency at harvard medical school. thanks for taking the time to appear today and really glad to take your statement at this time. >> the key members of the committee thinks limitation from centers for medicare/medicaid services initiative to pay higher medicare pays part b drugs to support higher quality care beneficiaries of the medicare program. we value the input and feedback we have received from congress members of the committee we're carefully reviewing the comments we have reviewed and receive
parts the drug spending has risen we have heard from many stakeholders have concerns about access to the cost and value of prescription drugs to address these concerns we have a proposed rule to test the new model to recruit patient care this proposed alliance under statutory goal with innovative models to reduce expenditures while preserving the quality of care. the proposal is part of a broader strategy smarter spending by paying for what works and finding new ways to coordinate into great care and quality revalue publican but and comment looking forward to work with stakeholders in the ongoing manner to maximize value and learn from the model we have received feedback from stakeholders' on several issues patient access in the
importance of patient influence be reviewing all comments closely to determine if adjustments are needed our goal is to be responsive under the current system in any part b drugs including those furnished in a hospital setting for provided from the fee but the new model would test if all these designs may improve our pays for prescription drugs and support positions in other clinicians to deliver higher quality care they can often choose between several drugs to treat a patient in this methodology can create disincentives for doctors to select lower-cost drugs even when they are as good orce better for patients based on the evidence also the elimination of certain
incentives as well as the creation of higher performing drugs including reducing ruminating patient cost sharing with the use of effective drugs and cms would test whether the current 6% at on pavement of a flat fee per drug per day changes prescribing incentives flat fee is calculated that his budget neutral the second phase focuses on better outcomes and clinical indicators to reprove the value by utilizing pricing tools currently employed by private health plans hospitals and other entities to manage health benefits and drug utilization unsuccessfully to ensure access to high-quality care and treatment is always at the forefront under the proposed model beneficiaries would have access to the same drugs as we retain
complete freedom of choice the proposed model would not affect drug coverage for any other benefits and also includes a number of beneficiaries projections like genu pre-appeal exception process to allow the beneficiary providers toappe explain why that value based pricing policy is not appropriate then to seek an exception and in addition will closely monitor access during the model this helps insure the beneficiaries will continue to have access under the model leas of americans alive andom medication to treat acute conditions we are committed to ensuring that they maintain access to high-quality treatment they need while pursuing better drug value moving forward
recommended to listening and working together with congress and other stakeholders to advance ideas to improve access and affordability and innovation so all americans have access there is no easy answers to the multifaceted challenges but there are benefits to all of us to work together to find solutions i appreciate the committee's interest afford to answering your questions. >> we appreciate you appearing before the committee and you can be a great help to us here today. some people say you're undermining the successful prescription drug program seral in waiving the provisions in order to negotiate the drug prices clearly such an undertaking would be a massive overreach beyond your statutory
authority but as we have seen on numerous occasions the obama administration doesn't always know where they're clear of the metss are so that being the case i take this very seriously and i feel compelled to risk is the innovation center working in any project to allow the government to renegotiate pride -- prices within either part the change related to drug he prices? and as you were the head of the innovation center, i would like to have a direct answer on that. >> we have no party proposals at this time we're constantly listening and engaging was stakeholders so we have payers and manufacturers have providers and others that bring ideas to us across health care we
view it as our role to engage with stakeholders to listen to ideas whether they come from congress or payers to engaged deeply on the statutory mission which is to engage with pavement as service delivery models within a high likelihood to improve quality with expenditures., whas >> as far as i'm concerned what you need to withdrawrt b ry the proposed rule that is shared by many and once again with a 300 stakeholder groups called the proposal almost immediately upon its release without objection in the letter referenced by
over 300 patients a provider organizations will be included in the record in addition to the stakeholders' nearly 300 members of congress have urged you to withdraw the proposal. many of the comments you have received talk about serious flaws so considering the up backlash it seems obvious that if you move forward with this experiment you'd be doing so against interest and judgment of the vast majority of policy makers and experts in this field be willing to read knowledge is widespread opposition to withdraw the proposal? >> we take the input from congress and from stakeholders across the health system very seriously that is why we proceeded through the rulemaking process which is the most
public and transparent process we can engaged in in reviewing the comments now and plan to make adjustments in the final rule.. we have currently over 1300 public comments we want to review those closely and carefully and thoroughly so we can be as responsive have a powerful as possible to the public input and from congress. >> well, it seems with this undr rule you're operating a to their promise that positions are purposely giving higher cost drugs when lower-cost equivalent is available now the agency's view apparently most physicians clinical driven by decisions are given by
maximizing those it just simpli seems to me it is over simplistic of fetas what they're doing given you are a doctor if there is the specific type of prescribinge changes they're expected to make under this payment scheme and to provide specific conditions. >> yes. i am a practicing physician and i think the vast majority of physicians make decisions based on patient interest in their want to say clearly i would one every physician in condition to prescribe the medicine needed for their patient and we believe this proposal allows that to happen and we're looking closely at whether adjustments are needed because access to medications is the firstf priority for cms and myself
personally and in terms of the recently proposed this test, the current system can have a disincentive forth physicians to use lower-cost medication so for example, if they prescribe the $10 medication the current 6% vat on is only $0.60 that may not fully cover the cost to acquire a board minister that medication so we're proposing this test to test to the proposal the we think would remove some of the current disincentives' to allow physicians and conditions to make those decisions with regard to financial incentives and we clearly want physicians and clinicians to prescribe what their patients need and for them to receive those benefits.
>> dr. conway go right to the question of prescription drug prices because it feels like they are getting hit by a wrecking ball medicare part b more than doubled20 between 2005 and 2015 increasing from 9.4 billion of but 22 billion in 2015. towad medicare has begun to move paying for quality and value rather than volume of services that has been recommended for ages and finally it is under way so far prescription drugs have been left of that equation have moved toward paying for value rather than volume i have been working on these issues since i was
co-director and i think itow is appropriate to ask now if the issue web prescription drug prices is not addressed aren't a the cost going to become increasingly unaffordable for older people and put a risk of medicare guaranteed? will they put at risk for future generations?? >> you correctly note to the growth of par be spending over 8 percent and a share your concerns the current as you environment with coinsurance with the button show a 20% as you can imagine for seniors on the fixed-income
20% of a $10,000 drug can beta a substantial financial hardship and could limit access to medication. tax we did propose this test because we had a proposal directly in veteran space to pay for value we do think that is important across the including in the whole system including the drug space we have others that include drugs the reducing pay for value is important similar to across the whole system whether hospitals or physicians.it >> does this threat and the sustainability of the program for future generations? >> it does have the medicare program h
potential the cost does have the potential to threaten the program and drugs are a substantial part of the cost reason i do this job quite frankly is i care deeply about the 55 millionud americans including my own mother i want medicare to be around for my four children and we have to make major positive changes in the delivery system to be the the as case. >> i appreciate the agency's interest to look at strategies and improve quality and value of all aspects including prescription drugs but one of the concerns brought to sidet members on our side is especially in a small rural area with not exactly as large practice, physicians
could be put in a position with a cost of the drug is higher than the medicare payment so what we are told it is impossible to afford to provide the medications to the patients and i am interested in your response and also if you could tell us what happens if that's the case if they send the patient to a hospital how the patient program then that means higher overall cost for both the older people and medicare so tell me your response because i know members on our side have brought that up. >> figure for the question. we propose to include rural
providers in small practices however we noted concern about some of these issues in the proposal to make sure we have access to medications in treatment l well we proposed these changes of a closely at public comments to determine whether any adjustments are needed for rural practices or small practices. we're doing the review now and we're looking at maintaining access to medication also similar to a plan afoot reviews to include real-time claims data monitoring for access and patient outcomes in the shift inside of service and if we needed we could make adjustments at the macro level with a policy but also the exceptions process toro make adjustments down to the
individual patient if needed >> el they have two questions but first things for coming today and as you have heard many people arel concerned about this ill-conceived experiment additionally the administration has not then responsive to congressional inquiries in addition to a letter signed by every republican on the committee and even some of my own letter and have not received inadequate response asking for clarification whether the proposal constitutes new research i am submitting that letter for the recordop and i hope you wouldn expedite an answer to that. number one. over t among the many concerns over this proposal with the